Crossing Industries at CEO Level: Managing the Confidence Curve

Ginni Rometty, former CEO of IBM, once said: “Growth and comfort do not coexist.” How can CEOs crossing into a new industry pursue growth without misreading temporary discomfort as permanent misfit?

It’s not uncommon for a successful CEO to move into a leadership role in a different industry, and then experience an unexpected crisis of confidence. 

On paper, they are proven. They’ve led organisations, delivered results, and earned the trust of boards. Yet in the early months of a new appointment, particularly in an unfamiliar sector, self-doubt can creep in. Some begin to question whether they truly belong at the top. A few even consider stepping down into a less exposed role. 

This is precisely the moment when maintaining a holistic perspective matters most. 

Why do leaders doubt themselves in new industries? 

The 2026 Strengthscope Team Effectiveness report shows that leaders consistently rate their own effectiveness lower than their stakeholders do, and that this perception gap widened by 20% year-on-year. At the same time, CEO self-confidence ranks among the lowest energising leadership strengths in the dataset. 

Annelize van Rensburg, Global Chair and Director of Executive Search at Signium in Johannesburg, shares her insights:

“Self-doubt isn’t necessarily a sign of incompetence. In fact, it’s often experienced by high achievers and associated with impostor syndrome – feelings of inadequacy despite evident success. For a CEO entering a new industry, this challenge is amplified.” 

• Industry fluency takes time to develop 

Industry fluency is the understanding of the language, regulatory landscape, competitive dynamics and informal networks within a sector. For CEOs crossing the boundaries into a new industry, gaining this contextual understanding takes time.  

“Industry-specific knowledge shortens the learning curve for new leaders,” says van Rensburg. “Without that fluency, even experienced executives can feel temporarily disoriented.” 

• Organisations enter a period of adjustment 

When a new CEO steps in, people become more cautious and informal conversations slow down. Decisions may take longer as teams pause to observe, assess and understand the new leader’s priorities. That temporary shift in behaviour can create a sense of distance or reduced engagement. For an incoming CEO, particularly one entering a new industry, this subtle recalibration can feel personal, yet in reality, it’s simply a natural response to uncertainty. 

• The CEO role carries heightened visibility  

At the CEO level, actions and decisions are more visible. There are fewer true peers to turn to and less informal feedback along the way. CEOs find themselves being closely observed by boards, investors and employees.  

Van Rensburg comments, “When the spotlight is constant, even small missteps can feel magnified. In this kind of environment, confidence can dip, even though the leader’s capability has not changed.” 

The five risks of premature CEO exit 

In these moments, the instinct may be to question whether the position itself is sustainable. Early-tenure discomfort can accelerate thoughts of stepping down or departure, particularly in unfamiliar industries or high-pressure contexts.  

“Boards should be cautious about perceiving early discomfort as failure,” says van Rensburg. “The CEO role compounds in influence over time, and impact typically becomes clearer once the initial adjustment period has passed. For CEOs entering a new industry, this can take many months, even years. Interpreting this lag as evidence of misfit can lead to premature decisions.” 

Some of the most significant risks of early CEO exit include:  

1. Strategic disruption 

When a CEO leaves early, momentum slows. Strategy can stall, transformation efforts lose pace, and the organisation often slips back into review mode instead of moving forward. What should have been a period of progress becomes yet another transition. 

2. Cultural instability 

People notice leadership changes. Even if performance is steady, an early exit can create doubt about direction and alignment. That uncertainty can quietly affect engagement and slow performance across levels. 

3. Market perceptions 

A short CEO tenure can raise questions from investors and stakeholders about stability and board confidence. The shorter the tenure, the more closely the move is examined. 

4. Talent and succession strain 

Every transition takes energy, as boards and executive teams must shift their focus back to succession instead of strategy. Frequent turnover can strain the leadership pipeline and make future appointments even harder. 

5. Personal brand consequences 

For the individual, a brief CEO tenure can shape future perception. Fair or not, markets notice duration. Questions about “fit” or resilience can follow the leader into subsequent roles. 

Capability is transferable. Context must be built. 

Industry expertise and executive capability are not the same thing. Boards appoint CEOs for judgment, strategic clarity, talent decisions and the ability to set direction. Those qualities are innate, no matter the industry. What does not come automatically is familiarity with the industry’s language, history and constraints. 

When a CEO enters a new sector, their first responsibility is to understand the terrain before attempting to reshape it. This means: 

• Conducting disciplined listening sessions across levels – not only with the top team, but with frontline leaders and long-tenured operators 

• Mapping informal influence networks, over and above formal reporting lines 

• Identifying the sector’s “non-negotiables”, like regulatory realities, capital constraints, customer expectations and legacy sensitivities 

• Partnering with two or three trusted internal translators who understand both the industry and the organisation’s history 

The organisation must also recognise that cross-industry transitions require structured support. Executive teams should be explicit about unwritten rules, past failed initiatives and political fault lines. “Support cannot be passive,” says van Rensburg. “In the early months, regular engagement and clear feedback are critical. Without it, a new CEO can misread the organisation and adjust too slowly or in the wrong direction.”  

Boards have a different responsibility. They set the time horizon, agreeing what success looks like in year one versus year three. This protects the CEO from being judged too quickly, and without this clarity, natural adjustment processes can be mistaken for underperformance. 

More organisations are recognising that onboarding leadership extends far beyond initial induction. Structured onboarding processes now span several months and often depend on the expertise of external advisors. Proper onboarding, which requires a significant investment of time, helps leaders identify key relationships, understand cultural dynamics, and build the context required for effective decision-making.  

The case for staying: Confidence is a phase – not the final verdict  

Leaders who are “CEO material” should remain at the C-level, but staying the course should not mean passive endurance or suffering in silence. Early discomfort is common, but what matters most is how it’s managed. 

Instead of asking, “Do I belong here?” leaders should ask: 

• Have I diagnosed the context accurately? 

• Do I have the right internal allies? 

• Are expectations aligned with the board? 

• Am I communicating frequently and clearly enough to counter uncertainty? 

A temporary loss of certainty shouldn’t be confused with a loss of capability. The early phase of a cross-sector move tests resilience, but not identity. Van Rensburg emphasises, “Capability doesn’t disappear; it becomes temporarily obscured by unfamiliar terrain.” 

Leaders who retreat during this window often leave before the inflection point. Those who commit to structured adaptation, by listening carefully, clarifying expectations and building the right internal alliances, move through the adjustment curve and emerge with deeper authority. 

“This doesn’t mean that the role is automatically easier,” concludes van Rensburg. “But it becomes much clearer, and clarity restores confidence.”